CRV (CRV)Price Live Chart, Prediction, Market Cap, Token Unlocks, CRV Concept Stocks CoinMeta

#	Exchange	Pairs	Price	+2%Depth	-2%Depth	Volume (24h)
1	OKX	CRVUSDC	0.196	$22,315.92	$31,062.98	92
2	Bitfinex	CRVUSDT	0.19662	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	1,040
3	Crypto.com Exchange	CRVUSDT	0.1984	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	1,835
4	gate.io	CRVUSDC	0.1983	$22,315.92	$31,062.98	37,217
5	Bybit	CRVUSDC	0.1985	$22,315.92	$31,062.98	40,057
6	CoinEx	CRVUSDT	0.198465	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	56,745
7	Bitunix	CRVUSDT	0.1981	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	132,419
8	gate.io	CRVUSDT	0.1986	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	162,919
9	BingX	CRVUSDT	0.1981	$72,353.03	$53,731.48	184,475
10	MEXC Global	CRVUSDC	0.1981	$22,315.92	$31,062.98	187,586

#	Unlock Date	Unlock Amount	Unlock Value	Total Supply %	Unlock Details
1	2026/06/05	316.56K	$62.58K	0.01%	1
2	2026/06/06	316.56K	$62.58K	0.01%	1
3	2026/06/07	316.56K	$62.58K	0.01%	1
4	2026/06/08	316.56K	$62.58K	0.01%	1
5	2026/06/09	316.56K	$62.58K	0.01%	1

Pantera Capital

2h ago

Follow

ETFs popularized investment access through brokerage accounts. Tokenization popularized investment access through the internet. WisdomTree has been preparing for this moment for years. @JeremyDSchwartz and Maredith Hannon (@WisdomTreePrime) are guests on the Stateful podcast hosted by @FranklinBi. In this episode, they discuss why tokenization will be the next ETF: - WisdomTree deployed to five EVM chains in just one day. Traditional finance cannot complete five integrations in a month. - Its tokenized money market fund, $WTGXX, has reached $700 million in assets under management, a six-fold increase year-over-year. - Launched use cases include: corporate treasury management, cross-border payroll management, and stablecoin reserve management. - Four years ago, WisdomTree used smart contracts to collaborate with JPMorgan Chase and Apollo to rebalance a portfolio of 3,000 models. - Europe leads the US by five years in cryptocurrency ETPs. The US is finally catching up. 01:14 The Development of WisdomTree and the ETF Revolution 03:43 Why Public Chains are Superior to Permissioned Chains 05:51 Deployment to Five EVM Chains in One Day 09:15 Introduction to WTGXX: Tokenized Money Market Funds 13:30 Corporate Finance, Salaries, and Practical Application Cases 20:07 The Rising Risk Curve: Derivatives vs. Equity Beta 23:51 On-Chain Rebalancing in Partnership with JPMorgan Chase and Apollo 29:09 WisdomTree's Two-Year Vision: $15 Billion and Beyond 32:39 Common Beginner Mistakes: Trust in Cryptocurrencies is Crucial 34:26 Surprisingly, Europe Leads the US in Cryptocurrency ETPs Spotify: Apple Podcast: YouTube:

308

0

29

Kraken Pro

5h ago

Follow

Kraken Pro has added 6 new trading pairs to support spot margin trading: $NEAR, $HBAR, $CRV, $XLM, $SHIB, and $TRX Now available to US margin traders Learn more: *Regional restrictions apply

462

0

43

Henrik Zeberg

06-03 21:11

Follow

Risk Rotation: Why a Joke Outperforms Tech Giants How capital shifts from the risk curve in the later stages of a bull market—what the dot-com bubble peak and every cryptocurrency cycle have taught us—and why the cryptocurrency rally isn't over yet. Click here to read:

324

0

48

Henrik Zeberg

06-03 18:39

Follow

Let me remind everyone again, what salvation can Bitcoin truly offer? And how can it save us? It's a bubble—and it will eventually burst. However—first—as the risk curve stretches further, the price could see a significant rebound.

302

0

38

Mister Crypto

06-03 16:10

Follow

Months ago, I pointed out that Bitcoin would fall from this parabolic curve. I said I expected a rebound, followed by further decline. And it happened exactly as I predicted. Now, we've almost completed the entire downtrend. History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes. The bottom of each parabolic cycle lies in the same area. We're now approaching that area. The bear market is nearing its end. The bottom is in sight. Now, the previous preparations are starting to pay off.

486

0

39

6529

06-03 15:57

Follow

Today, a new chapter has been added to a crazy quantum saga. On March 31st, Google's quantum AI team published a landmark achievement regarding Shor's elliptic curve cryptography algorithm. From a technical perspective, this paper is a bombshell: its performance is 10 times better than existing technologies. To shock the blockchain field and sound the alarm, these optimizations were applied to secp256k1—the elliptic curve cryptography algorithm upon which Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures are based. But perhaps the most striking aspect of this paper isn't its technical aspects, but its social implications. Instead of following standard academic procedures, Google kept these optimizations secret, hiding them behind zero-knowledge proofs (ZK proofs). In an accompanying blog post, Google mentioned that they "communicated with the US government." Zero-knowledge proofs can prove the existence of algorithmic improvements without revealing details. The use of zero-knowledge proofs for academic censorship is unprecedented! As a co-author of this Google paper, I have personally experienced some of the background surrounding this censorship mechanism. Frankly, many aspects of this matter make me uneasy. While I believe the public should know more, my ability to reveal the truth is limited. However, one thing I must make clear: the professionalism of the Google team is exemplary, and they deserve praise. Censorship often backfires. The “Straissam effect”—trying to cover something up only attracts more attention—is playing out today. First, Google’s key optimization technique was rediscovered by the French. Even more exciting is that a collaborative challenge called “Shor-at-home” has just started. The challenge, hosted at ecdsa[.]fail, broke the Shor world record in just a few hours. Let’s talk about the rediscovery. Just two months after Google’s paper was published, French quantum expert André Schrottenloch cracked this key secret optimization technique. His paper, “Optimized Point Adder Circuits for Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithms,” was published today on arXiv. Congratulations to André! He beat several other experts who were “nerdsnipping.” In a blog post published today, Craig Giedney, a global expert in Shor optimization, revealed that he had suppressed this optimization scheme for a whole year due to censorship pressure. Interestingly, Andre overlooked some subtle optimizations, including those initially released by Google and subsequent improvements. Shor's algorithm likely has significant room for improvement, which is precisely the significance of the ECDSA[.]fail challenge. The verification program developed for ZK proofs performs a dual function, automatically filtering valid submissions. Dozens of small, cumulative improvements are constantly emerging. As of this writing, the Google circuit has achieved an 8.4% performance improvement, measured by the product of the number of logical qubits and the number of Tofoli gates. Not bad! This "nerdsnipping" has gone far deeper than expected. Over the past few weeks, it has become clear that the impact of this research extends far beyond Andre and other quantum experts. Behind the scenes, a small group of amateurs has quietly begun their research. Inspired by Kapacsi-style automated research, they have used artificial intelligence techniques to study Shor. Ironically, the verification program for zero-knowledge proofs happens to provide an ideal reward function for artificial intelligence. The barrier to entry for this modern research approach is surprisingly low; even some non-experts, including a teenager, have found decent optimizations. If you'd like to join a Telegram group to connect with other researchers in automation, feel free to contact us :) Part Two: Neutral Atoms and Quantum Day The story didn't end with Google's IPO. On the same day Google went public, a low-profile startup called Oratomic released its own Shor paper, simultaneously. This paper caused a sensation, eventually becoming the most upvoted paper on scirate[.]com (a site that ranks arXiv papers). Oratomic's claim was astonishing. By borrowing Google's logical optimization approach and applying a custom physical optimization approach for neutral atoms, they achieved this. They claimed that only 10,000 physical qubits were needed to run Shor's algorithm on secp256k1. This number is incredibly low. Before Oratomic's paper was published, I knew almost nothing about neutral atoms, so I was deeply drawn in and decided to delve into the technology. I jumped down the rabbit hole, spending hundreds of hours on the subject. I was quite fascinated, watching every YouTube video I could find and consulting numerous experts. My conclusion? This technology is real, very real. Even Google recently decided to establish a neutral atom lab, marking their shift from focusing on superconducting qubits to neutral atoms. If you're interested in "qday," the day a quantum computer breaks the first production-ready cryptographic code, then neutral atoms are worth your attention. I gave a 30-minute talk at the ZKProof cryptography conference, sharing some of my insights on Shor's algorithm and neutral atoms. You can find it on YouTube by searching "zkproof neutral atom". There's an interesting observation regarding these two groundbreaking papers: neither Google nor Oratomic mentioned what their findings mean for qday. No timeline, absolutely none. This is particularly puzzling considering that the whole point of white-hat quantum cryptography is to inform predictions of qday and help the public make informed decisions. Therefore, I wanted to try to fill some gaps, much like Scott Aaronson did in his April 29th article. Based on all the information I have, including some worrying non-public information...I now believe there's a 50% probability that quantum cryptography will arrive in 2032, and a 10% probability in 2030. There's also a rumor that the US government has its own date: 2035. This date was initially proposed by the National Security Agency (NSA) and later adopted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), at which time all US government departments would be prohibited from using cryptographic technologies vulnerable to quantum attacks. Simply put: in hindsight, this date is a joke and should be completely ignored. I don't understand how NIST could avoid being forced to implement this plan years earlier. Part Three: Post-Quantum Cryptography Now, we have ample reason to raise alarms. But don't panic. Rushing into an immature post-quantum cryptography system is tantamount to suicide. I believe the appropriate target date for the migration is 2029, about 3.5 years away. Coincidentally, 2029 is also the date jointly chosen by Google, Cloudflare, and the Ethereum Foundation. Currently, I dedicate most of my time to the secure migration of Ethereum to post-quantum cryptography, which is also part of a broader effort to streamline Ethereum. There is still much work to be done. We need to remove and replace BLS signatures at the consensus layer, KZG commitments at the data layer, and ECDSA signatures at the execution layer. The plan to achieve this is compelling and based on hash cryptography. Within the Ethereum Foundation, we have developed a Swiss Army knife called leanVM (github[.]com/leanEthereum/leanVM), powered by a hash-based SNARK algorithm. Its performance is fully guaranteed thanks to the outstanding work of Emile, Thomas, and other contributors. In terms of security, leanVM is a gem; it is a minimalist zkVM designed for end-to-end formal verification and maximum security. Want to contribute? Here are two $1 million initiatives. The first is the Proximity Prize (proximityprize[.]org). Solving a long-standing mathematical conjecture in coding theory and improving hash-based SNARKs could earn a million-dollar prize. Secondly, the Poseidon Initiative (poseidon-initiative[.]info) offers a $1 million prize for cracking Poseidon.

330

0

31

BNB🔶Frog

06-03 13:19

Follow

If you bought Bitcoin for 1000 yuan in 2010 and held it until now, it would be worth 10 billion yuan. Sounds easy enough, just hold on, right? But if you actually look at the profit curve of $BTC, you'll find that the emotional journey of those 1000 BTC is absolutely unbearable. 1000 / 100,000 / 1 million / 30,000 / 5 million / 800,000 / 20 million / 3 million / 500 million / 80 million / 10 billion. Ask yourself again, could you really hold on?

495

0

31

Paul Graham

06-03 08:19

Follow

Today, a new chapter has been added to a crazy quantum saga. On March 31st, Google's quantum AI team published a landmark achievement regarding Shor's elliptic curve cryptography algorithm. From a technical perspective, this paper is a bombshell: its performance is 10 times better than existing technologies. To shock the blockchain field and sound the alarm, these optimizations were applied to secp256k1—the elliptic curve cryptography algorithm upon which Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures are based. But perhaps the most striking aspect of this paper isn't its technical aspects, but its social implications. Instead of following standard academic procedures, Google kept these optimizations secret, hiding them behind zero-knowledge proofs (ZK proofs). In an accompanying blog post, Google mentioned that they "communicated with the US government." Zero-knowledge proofs can prove the existence of algorithmic improvements without revealing details. The use of zero-knowledge proofs for academic censorship is unprecedented! As a co-author of this Google paper, I have personally experienced some of the background surrounding this censorship mechanism. Frankly, many aspects of this matter make me uneasy. While I believe the public should know more, my ability to reveal the truth is limited. However, one thing I must make clear: the professionalism of the Google team is exemplary, and they deserve praise. Censorship often backfires. The “Straissam effect”—trying to cover something up only attracts more attention—is playing out today. First, Google’s key optimization technique was rediscovered by the French. Even more exciting is that a collaborative challenge called “Shor-at-home” has just started. The challenge, hosted at ecdsa[.]fail, broke the Shor world record in just a few hours. Let’s talk about the rediscovery. Just two months after Google’s paper was published, French quantum expert André Schrottenloch cracked this key secret optimization technique. His paper, “Optimized Point Adder Circuits for Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithms,” was published today on arXiv. Congratulations to André! He beat several other experts who were “nerdsnipping.” In a blog post published today, Craig Giedney, a global expert in Shor optimization, revealed that he had suppressed this optimization scheme for a whole year due to censorship pressure. Interestingly, Andre overlooked some subtle optimizations, including those initially released by Google and subsequent improvements. Shor's algorithm likely has significant room for improvement, which is precisely the significance of the ECDSA[.]fail challenge. The verification program developed for ZK proofs performs a dual function, automatically filtering valid submissions. Dozens of small, cumulative improvements are constantly emerging. As of this writing, the Google circuit has achieved an 8.4% performance improvement, measured by the product of the number of logical qubits and the number of Tofoli gates. Not bad! This "nerdsnipping" has gone far deeper than expected. Over the past few weeks, it has become clear that the impact of this research extends far beyond Andre and other quantum experts. Behind the scenes, a small group of amateurs has quietly begun their research. Inspired by Kapacsi-style automated research, they have used artificial intelligence techniques to study Shor. Ironically, the verification program for zero-knowledge proofs happens to provide an ideal reward function for artificial intelligence. The barrier to entry for this modern research approach is surprisingly low; even some non-experts, including a teenager, have found decent optimizations. If you'd like to join a Telegram group to connect with other researchers in automation, feel free to contact us :) Part Two: Neutral Atoms and Quantum Day The story didn't end with Google's IPO. On the same day Google went public, a low-profile startup called Oratomic released its own Shor paper, simultaneously. This paper caused a sensation, eventually becoming the most upvoted paper on scirate[.]com (a site that ranks arXiv papers). Oratomic's claim was astonishing. By borrowing Google's logical optimization approach and applying a custom physical optimization approach for neutral atoms, they achieved this. They claimed that only 10,000 physical qubits were needed to run Shor's algorithm on secp256k1. This number is incredibly low. Before Oratomic's paper was published, I knew almost nothing about neutral atoms, so I was deeply drawn in and decided to delve into the technology. I jumped down the rabbit hole, spending hundreds of hours on the subject. I was quite fascinated, watching every YouTube video I could find and consulting numerous experts. My conclusion? This technology is real, very real. Even Google recently decided to establish a neutral atom lab, marking their shift from focusing on superconducting qubits to neutral atoms. If you're interested in "qday," the day a quantum computer breaks the first production-ready cryptographic code, then neutral atoms are worth your attention. I gave a 30-minute talk at the ZKProof cryptography conference, sharing some of my insights on Shor's algorithm and neutral atoms. You can find it on YouTube by searching "zkproof neutral atom". There's an interesting observation regarding these two groundbreaking papers: neither Google nor Oratomic mentioned what their findings mean for qday. No timeline, absolutely none. This is particularly puzzling considering that the whole point of white-hat quantum cryptography is to inform predictions of qday and help the public make informed decisions. Therefore, I wanted to try to fill some gaps, much like Scott Aaronson did in his April 29th article. Based on all the information I have, including some worrying non-public information...I now believe there's a 50% probability that quantum cryptography will arrive in 2032, and a 10% probability in 2030. There's also a rumor that the US government has its own date: 2035. This date was initially proposed by the National Security Agency (NSA) and later adopted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), at which time all US government departments would be prohibited from using cryptographic technologies vulnerable to quantum attacks. Simply put: in hindsight, this date is a joke and should be completely ignored. I don't understand how NIST could avoid being forced to implement this plan years earlier. Part Three: Post-Quantum Cryptography Now, we have ample reason to raise alarms. But don't panic. Rushing into an immature post-quantum cryptography system is tantamount to suicide. I believe the appropriate target date for the migration is 2029, about 3.5 years away. Coincidentally, 2029 is also the date jointly chosen by Google, Cloudflare, and the Ethereum Foundation. Currently, I dedicate most of my time to the secure migration of Ethereum to post-quantum cryptography, which is also part of a broader effort to streamline Ethereum. There is still much work to be done. We need to remove and replace BLS signatures at the consensus layer, KZG commitments at the data layer, and ECDSA signatures at the execution layer. The plan to achieve this is compelling and based on hash cryptography. Within the Ethereum Foundation, we have developed a Swiss Army knife called leanVM (github[.]com/leanEthereum/leanVM), powered by a hash-based SNARK algorithm. Its performance is fully guaranteed thanks to the outstanding work of Emile, Thomas, and other contributors. In terms of security, leanVM is a gem; it is a minimalist zkVM designed for end-to-end formal verification and maximum security. Want to contribute? Here are two $1 million initiatives. The first is the Proximity Prize (proximityprize[.]org). Solving a long-standing mathematical conjecture in coding theory and improving hash-based SNARKs could earn a million-dollar prize. Secondly, the Poseidon Initiative (poseidon-initiative[.]info) offers a $1 million prize for cracking Poseidon.

461

0

31

sassal.eth/acc 🦇🔊

06-03 05:00

Follow

Today, a new chapter has been added to a crazy quantum saga. On March 31st, Google's quantum AI team published a landmark achievement regarding Shor's elliptic curve cryptography algorithm. From a technical perspective, this paper is a bombshell: its performance is 10 times better than existing technologies. To shock the blockchain field and sound the alarm, these optimizations were applied to secp256k1—the elliptic curve cryptography algorithm upon which Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures are based. But perhaps the most striking aspect of this paper isn't its technical aspects, but its social implications. Instead of following standard academic procedures, Google kept these optimizations secret, hiding them behind zero-knowledge proofs (ZK proofs). In an accompanying blog post, Google mentioned that they "communicated with the US government." Zero-knowledge proofs can prove the existence of algorithmic improvements without revealing details. The use of zero-knowledge proofs for academic censorship is unprecedented! As a co-author of this Google paper, I have personally experienced some of the background surrounding this censorship mechanism. Frankly, many aspects of this matter make me uneasy. While I believe the public should know more, my ability to reveal the truth is limited. However, one thing I must make clear: the professionalism of the Google team is exemplary, and they deserve praise. Censorship often backfires. The “Straissam effect”—trying to cover something up only attracts more attention—is playing out today. First, Google’s key optimization technique was rediscovered by the French. Even more exciting is that a collaborative challenge called “Shor-at-home” has just started. The challenge, hosted at ecdsa[.]fail, broke the Shor world record in just a few hours. Let’s talk about the rediscovery. Just two months after Google’s paper was published, French quantum expert André Schrottenloch cracked this key secret optimization technique. His paper, “Optimized Point Adder Circuits for Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithms,” was published today on arXiv. Congratulations to André! He beat several other experts who were “nerdsnipping.” In a blog post published today, Craig Giedney, a global expert in Shor optimization, revealed that he had suppressed this optimization scheme for a whole year due to censorship pressure. Interestingly, Andre overlooked some subtle optimizations, including those initially released by Google and subsequent improvements. Shor's algorithm likely has significant room for improvement, which is precisely the significance of the ECDSA[.]fail challenge. The verification program developed for ZK proofs performs a dual function, automatically filtering valid submissions. Dozens of small, cumulative improvements are constantly emerging. As of this writing, the Google circuit has achieved an 8.4% performance improvement, measured by the product of the number of logical qubits and the number of Tofoli gates. Not bad! This "nerdsnipping" has gone far deeper than expected. Over the past few weeks, it has become clear that the impact of this research extends far beyond Andre and other quantum experts. Behind the scenes, a small group of amateurs has quietly begun their research. Inspired by Kapacsi-style automated research, they have used artificial intelligence techniques to study Shor. Ironically, the verification program for zero-knowledge proofs happens to provide an ideal reward function for artificial intelligence. The barrier to entry for this modern research approach is surprisingly low; even some non-experts, including a teenager, have found decent optimizations. If you'd like to join a Telegram group to connect with other researchers in automation, feel free to contact us :) Part Two: Neutral Atoms and Quantum Day The story didn't end with Google's IPO. On the same day Google went public, a low-profile startup called Oratomic released its own Shor paper, simultaneously. This paper caused a sensation, eventually becoming the most upvoted paper on scirate[.]com (a site that ranks arXiv papers). Oratomic's claim was astonishing. By borrowing Google's logical optimization approach and applying a custom physical optimization approach for neutral atoms, they achieved this. They claimed that only 10,000 physical qubits were needed to run Shor's algorithm on secp256k1. This number is incredibly low. Before Oratomic's paper was published, I knew almost nothing about neutral atoms, so I was deeply drawn in and decided to delve into the technology. I jumped down the rabbit hole, spending hundreds of hours on the subject. I was quite fascinated, watching every YouTube video I could find and consulting numerous experts. My conclusion? This technology is real, very real. Even Google recently decided to establish a neutral atom lab, marking their shift from focusing on superconducting qubits to neutral atoms. If you're interested in "qday," the day a quantum computer breaks the first production-ready cryptographic code, then neutral atoms are worth your attention. I gave a 30-minute talk at the ZKProof cryptography conference, sharing some of my insights on Shor's algorithm and neutral atoms. You can find it on YouTube by searching "zkproof neutral atom". There's an interesting observation regarding these two groundbreaking papers: neither Google nor Oratomic mentioned what their findings mean for qday. No timeline, absolutely none. This is particularly puzzling considering that the whole point of white-hat quantum cryptography is to inform predictions of qday and help the public make informed decisions. Therefore, I wanted to try to fill some gaps, much like Scott Aaronson did in his April 29th article. Based on all the information I have, including some worrying non-public information...I now believe there's a 50% probability that quantum cryptography will arrive in 2032, and a 10% probability in 2030. There's also a rumor that the US government has its own date: 2035. This date was initially proposed by the National Security Agency (NSA) and later adopted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), at which time all US government departments would be prohibited from using cryptographic technologies vulnerable to quantum attacks. Simply put: in hindsight, this date is a joke and should be completely ignored. I don't understand how NIST could avoid being forced to implement this plan years earlier. Part Three: Post-Quantum Cryptography Now, we have ample reason to raise alarms. But don't panic. Rushing into an immature post-quantum cryptography system is tantamount to suicide. I believe the appropriate target date for the migration is 2029, about 3.5 years away. Coincidentally, 2029 is also the date jointly chosen by Google, Cloudflare, and the Ethereum Foundation. Currently, I dedicate most of my time to the secure migration of Ethereum to post-quantum cryptography, which is also part of a broader effort to streamline Ethereum. There is still much work to be done. We need to remove and replace BLS signatures at the consensus layer, KZG commitments at the data layer, and ECDSA signatures at the execution layer. The plan to achieve this is compelling and based on hash cryptography. Within the Ethereum Foundation, we have developed a Swiss Army knife called leanVM (github[.]com/leanEthereum/leanVM), powered by a hash-based SNARK algorithm. Its performance is fully guaranteed thanks to the outstanding work of Emile, Thomas, and other contributors. In terms of security, leanVM is a gem; it is a minimalist zkVM designed for end-to-end formal verification and maximum security. Want to contribute? Here are two $1 million initiatives. The first is the Proximity Prize (proximityprize[.]org). Solving a long-standing mathematical conjecture in coding theory and improving hash-based SNARKs could earn a million-dollar prize. Secondly, the Poseidon Initiative (poseidon-initiative[.]info) offers a $1 million prize for cracking Poseidon.

346

0

30

Bitcoin Old Fat (Sensitive Fat Starting Over Version)

06-02 22:46

Follow

I just tried trading US stocks on Gate.com, and it's incredibly simple, smooth, and has no barriers to entry. No complicated deposit process is needed; simply transfer USDT to your stock account to quickly place an order. The whole process is very smooth. The trading experience is very similar to what I usually experience with crypto trading. Orders are responsive, execution is efficient, and the operation logic is simple, without the cumbersome feeling of traditional brokerages. Furthermore, it supports fractional share trading, so you don't need to prepare a large amount of capital to buy a whole share. This is very friendly to users with small capital. Fractional share trading is indeed very practical. Before, when I saw some high-quality tech stocks with high prices, I always worried about not being able to utilize my capital. Now, even with a budget of only a few hundred dollars, I can buy in batches of 0.1 or 0.2 shares, without having to buy the whole share at once. I've personally tested it and it works great. During the trading process, both order placement and execution feedback are very smooth overall. People familiar with crypto trading have virtually no learning curve; the interface and operation are easy to pick up. After experiencing it, I think Gate.com... The biggest advantage of US stocks isn't just "being able to trade US stocks," but rather the more natural connection between digital assets and traditional financial markets, making it particularly beginner-friendly. In short, it's not much different from trading cryptocurrencies. #GateStocks

391

0

36